Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBC 2
MSNBCW 2
WBAL (NBC) 2
WRC (NBC) 2
CNN 1
CNNW 1
CSPAN 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 17
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
limiting military pay increases which effectively decreases troop's salaries. our pentagon correspondent barbara starr's got the details. barbara, what's going on? >> you know, wolf, here in washington, nothing can be more sensitive than pay for america's armed forces, but the troops are looking at being caught right in the middle of it all. >> thank you, sir. >> reporter: the troops usually are happy to see defense secretary panetta, smiles and handshakes all around. but days before he leaves office, panetta has bad news. he's proposing less money in their paycheck next year. panetta, a savvy washington operative in budget politics, is leaving it to congress to figure out how not to cut pay and keep thousands of defense employees on the job. >> we will furlough as many as 800,000 dod civilians around the country for up to 22 days. they could face a 20% cut in their salary. don't think that's going to impact on our economy? >> reporter: the recommendation to slow the military pay raise will put troops in the middle of that political fight between congress and the president over spending.
is virginia home to the pentagon, the world's largest u.s. navy base, but a hub for major defense contractors such as aircraft builders. so the impact over 200,000 jobs, second only to california. you can't want this automatic spending cut to go forward. >> you know, clearly this is not, david, the best way to go about trying to chroontrol spending. and we have demonstrated in the house two separate occasions -- one of the bills we put across the floor and passed i was the sponsor of for that reason. these are indiscriminate cuts. we can do a lot better. what i hope to be able to hear from the president in the state of the union is he wants to join us in trying to effect much smarter cuts in spending. >> but that's what he's saying. >> we don't have to have the impact that you just described. >> why not work with him on short-term measure which he is talking about to delay this, find a different way to go about some of the cuts? >> the problem is, david, every time you turn around the answer is to raise taxes. and, you know, he just got his tax hike on the wealthy. and you can't in this town
federal government except the pentagon. all of a sudden the last couple of months hitting this arbitrary political target is vital. what is vital, as i said, is having a deficit strategy that's consistent with sound economic growth and making sure that we strengthen the middle class and that means as a first step to make sure that our deficits, as the economy improves, as we grow, that our deficits are not growing faster than g.d.p. and that we stabilize the debt as a percentage of g.d.p. because if you don't, as the economy improves, higher government borrowing -- we need to adopt that strategy and adopt it now. have it kicked in over a period of time. we just got very good news that the rate of per capita increase in health care costs is actually at the lowest level of 50 years. we need to continue to adopt strategies to keep that -- those costs increase low. as as demographic changes means baby boomers retire and we clearly need to keep working on those issues. but let me just sum up where we are in terms of our deficit reduction targets. over the last little over two years we have no
when he talks. apparently brennan wants to put them under pentagon control. who knows if that is true but there are three things i was shocked the democrats didn't bring up. and it's three questions that every president obama ditto head has to respond to. i don't like criticizing this but let's be honestly about a couple of things. number 1, the word imminent how that no longer means imminent and it means we think you might do something 20s years from now and that makes you an imminent threat and we have to kill you with with no trial. no. 2 is militant. any male over the age of 16 whose near where one of these bombs goes off is counted as a militant whether they were or not. toe try to talk al-qaeda guys. >> that's how they keep the civilian death tolls low. it's a dirt dirty business. number 3, blowback, what no democrat asked about is every time we kill an america hater with one of these things we are creating untold numbers of new. so it's person pet y'all war. >> i would add a high informed -- highly placed. we don't know who that i
defending former republican senator chuck hagel saying that he will be an excellent pentagon chief. now, this comes after a fiery confirmation hearing with members of the senate armed services committee. he faced some tough questions including this one from senator james imhoff. >> why do you think the rainan foreign ministry strongly supports your nomination to be the secretary of defense? >> i have a difficult enough time with american politics senator. i have no idea, but thank you. >> senators could vote as early as this week. washington times columnist charlie hurt joins us to weigh in on whether we can expect senator hagel to be cob confirmed as defense secretary. >>> the reverend jesse jackson is leading a march today in honor of a chicago teenager killed this week. the 15-year-old high school band member gunned down days after attending the president's inauguration. just the latest victim in a city where there are 515 murders last year alone. more than 100 shooting incidents have occurred since january 1. reverend jackson called on president obama to come to his home town of chi
during the testimony, it was interesting because panetta said the pentagon, the c.i.a., and the department of state were all on board with sending the rebels in syria where there has been mass genocide because ofor us to send them arms. you know who said no? the white house. well, we don't know if it's going to work. we don't know which of the rebels to arm. ultimately we don't know if it will result in the ouster of assad. >> brian: the "washington post" lead editorial today says hillary clinton and david petraeus, running the c.i.a. identified the group that they believe would have been the preferrable group to take over through all the rebels, they weeded through and had a plan. and the president nixed it. the word is too political. they wanted to make it seem we're not on a war footing with the election a month away. >> gretchen: maybe the election playing a huge role. let's look at the fox news polls right now. recently conducted, how many people feel our country compared to five years ago? nearly half of those polled say america is weaker and less powerful to
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)